Police say Fayette judge harassed via social media
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Tuesday, Nov. 20, 2012, 12:01 a.m.
Someone is using online social media to spread false rumors of criminal misconduct by a Fayette County judge and others, according to the district attorney.
Jack Heneks said state police at Uniontown have initiated a harassment investigation to attempt to identify one or more people responsible for the ongoing attacks against various officials, including Judge Nancy Vernon.
“We not infringing on anyone's First Amendment rights to criticize, but these appear to go beyond comment, and are alleging criminal arrests and criminal prosecutions of people which are simply not true,” Heneks said Monday. “We are seeking to get to the bottom of these unfounded reports.”
Trooper James Garlick of state police at Uniontown said in a news release that Vernon has been harassed through “social media” at “various locations” over an unspecified time period. He declined to go into specifics because the investigation is ongoing.
Vernon could not be reached for comment.
Heneks and Garlick said criminal charges could result, depending on where the investigation leads.
“It depends on what we uncover,” Garlick said.
Anyone with information that could help police identify the source of the rumors is asked to contact Garlick at 724-415-1208.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.